Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/05/08
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
Bruce,
We have been through this before. Some folks think it is not wise from a theft or fraud standpoint to give the exact serial number. I suppose it goes like this: You post that you have lens #1234567. Then you get a letter from X saying he lost 1234567 in a robbery, so give it back, etc. If you had only posted 1234xxx then Mr. X has only 1 chance in 999 of guessing your number. Otherwise, I can't see the reason why we only post partial numbers.
If you read the latest Viewfinder you will see that not every Leicaphile is honorable.
In any event, I don't hesitate to post full numbers myself.
Bob
>>> Bruce Feist <bfeist@flock.org> 05/07 7:28 PM >>>
Hi, Noel and other Leicaphiles;
I'm curious; why don't people include exact serial numbers in these messages? (It comes to my mind in this message because I have
an Elmar 2.8 in the same batch, and am somewhat curious about just how close they are.)
Bruce
> From: "Noel H. Charchuk" <nhcharch@calcna.ab.ca>
> Subject: [Leica] Nooky-Hesum
>
> Can a Nooky Hesum close up attachment be used with the later Elmar 2.8
> collapsible? Serial nunber of the Elmar is 1494***. They seem to be the
> same length and the flanges appear to be the same.